1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

(1) Defendant B’s KRW 4,994,440 and KRW 3,215.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. (1) The Plaintiff is a person who purchased G apartment 113 Dong 706 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) on the land other than Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu Seoul, and six lots of land in the process of voluntary auction D and E (Dual). The Plaintiff is a person who completely pays the price on October 1 of the same year.

(2) Defendant B is a person who owned the instant apartment before the Plaintiff purchased it.

Defendant C is his wife.

B. The Plaintiff’s execution of the delivery order (1) The Defendants continued to reside after the Plaintiff purchased the apartment of this case.

(2) On October 7, 2013, the Plaintiff received an order to deliver the instant apartment against Defendant B.

(H) (3) On November 21, 2013, the enforcement officer affiliated with this court ordered the Plaintiff to occupy the apartment of this case by executing the above delivery order.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. As to the claim for damages caused by illegal possession (1), the Defendants considered that the Defendants resided without title in the instant apartment from October 1, 2013 when they acquired the Plaintiff’s ownership of the instant apartment from October 1, 2013 to November 21 of the same year when the delivery of the instant apartment was executed.

In addition to Defendant B, it is reasonable to see that Defendant C also occupied it as a joint possessor as well as mere assistant in possession in relation to the Plaintiff.

(See Supreme Court Decision 98Da16456, 16463 delivered on June 26, 1998). We examine the amount of damages to be compensated by the Defendants.

According to the results of appraisal by appraiser I of the first instance trial and the purport of the entire pleadings, the sum of the rent for the instant apartment from October 1, 2013 to November 21 of the same year can be recognized as KRW 3,215,100.

The Defendants jointly have the obligation to pay the said money and the damages for delay to the Plaintiff.

(2) As to the Defendants’ assertion, the Defendants were to leave the instant apartment on November 20, 2013, and thus, did not execute the delivery order until then.